MI: Appeals judges call for change to sex offenders registration law

The state appeals court recently called for state lawmakers to amend the state Sex Offenders Registration Act to show it includes offenders convicted of nonsexual crimes against children.

A three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals made the statements in a March 26 opinion in which it denied the appeal of ____ _ ____, 48, of Sterling Heights, who along with two co-defendants was convicted in 2012 of 10 crimes related to imprisoning, assaulting and torturing four male juveniles for several hours in retaliation for breaking into his home. He is serving a nearly seven-year prison term.

____ and his co-defendants were required to register as a sex offender because unlawful imprisonment of a minor is a listed offense in the state law. Full Article

Opinion – Michigan Court of Appeals

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Maybe they need another registry …. an assault registry for everyone convicted of a violence-related offense. Oh, and make sure it’s retroactive all the way back to 1980!
What? People up in arms?? People opposed to such an extreme measure??
Domestic violence, bar fights, spanked your child … register them all, I say!

See what I mean? They call things that are not remotely related to “sex” sexual! This is insanity!

“… Bosca’s inclusion on the list could affect him in many ways, such as where he lives and employment, among others.”
We can’t have someone who has only been convicted “of extortion, four counts of unlawful imprisonment, felony firearm and four counts of felonious assault, as well as possession of marijuana and operating a drug house” cluttering up our sex offended registry and causing any disruption to his life and employment.
Now if Bosca had peed in front of those teenagers, well now that’s serious, and somehow registration wouldn’t be life altering or punitive anymore, but just an inconvenience. Glad they cleared that up.

ANOTHER arrow into Janice’s powerful quiver of legal decisions that undermine the constitutionality of the sex offender registry as a whole.